The Auron MacIntyre Show - Who Commits Political Violence？｜ Guest： Aydin Paladin ｜ 12⧸10⧸25

00:00:00.160 Hey everybody, how's it going? Thanks for joining me this afternoon. I've got a great stream with a great guest I think you're really going to enjoy.

00:00:07.140 We've seen a ton of leftist political violence recently from the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the shooting of Donald Trump.

00:00:16.080 We just had shots fired at Tim Pool. Other conservative commentators like Matt Walsh and Benny Johnson are receiving threats at their house from people.

00:00:25.260 We see a lot of leftist violence, but over and over again we hear from academics, we hear from journalists, we even hear from Trump's former head of the FBI that it's actually conservatives, radical right-wingers that are the most violent people in the United States, most likely to bring domestic terror or political violence.

00:00:44.320 But is that true when we look at the actual statistics, the actual data? Is that really how it breaks out?

00:00:50.280 Joining me today to discuss this topic is a social scientist and someone who does a lot of great work on YouTube, Aidan Paladin. Thank you so much for joining me.

00:00:58.420 Hey, thanks for having me. Yeah, I've been looking into this. I recently did a video about it.

00:01:04.340 And for the most part, there is a lot of veracity to the claim that the right is more violent.

00:01:09.680 But you have to go a little bit behind the front-facing part of the data to be able to see maybe why that's the case or what's really happening there.

00:01:18.480 Because that part wasn't so obvious until you actually went through, I actually went through the data sets for that.

00:01:24.300 Specifically, what I wanted to avoid with that is, as I'm sure you're well aware, oftentimes when you talk about violence or aggression or crime, they'll throw in things like prison violence while excluding things like gang violence.

00:01:37.860 And that is a very easy way to skew data to produce a certain result.

00:01:42.760 So when I looked at it, I just looked at terrorism, official reports of terrorism.

00:01:47.720 There are two data sets that are used. It's the Global Terrorism Database data set, which is, of course, global, but includes the United States.

00:01:54.740 I also ran a similar analysis, very similar to what I, identical to the one I did in the U.S., in the U.K., and found almost the identical, an identical trend.

00:02:03.980 And the numbers were not precisely the same, but the valence was identical, and the effect sizes were nearly identical.

00:02:11.680 And then the other data set is the, I always forget the name of it, it's Profiles of Individuals, Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States data set, or PIRIS.

00:02:20.920 That one is, of course, a U.S.-only data set.

00:02:23.180 But the thing to be aware of with both of these data sets, and with any kind of mass-scale data analysis, is that there's inclusion criteria that whoever is putting these data sets together decides on what goes in, what's kept out.

00:02:36.360 So you have two data sets, and when you look at how many terrorist attacks has the right done versus the left, and they're completely oppositional to one another.

00:02:43.780 Those two data sets, even just for the United States, covering the same periods of time.

00:02:47.600 So that's an initial problem with it, right out the gate, right?

00:02:51.580 Well, and that's definitely why I wanted to have you on, because I feel like this is something that the headlines just get out there.

00:02:56.960 People look at one line somewhere, and they simply don't have the mastery to understand, you know, the data sets you're talking about, the nuances of how things are selected.

00:03:06.140 So I want to get into all that with you, but before we do, let's hear from today's sponsor.

00:03:10.880 Everyone knows that college is a major investment, so it's really important to do your research.

00:03:14.980 You want to find a school that shares your values, but who has the time to dig through all those college websites?

00:03:20.300 Well, today I've got great news for you.

00:03:22.240 There's a free, easy-to-use resource that does the work for you.

00:03:25.720 It's called christiancollegeguide.com.

00:03:28.760 This online directory of over 250 Christian colleges and universities is a one-stop shop.

00:03:35.420 christiancollegeguide.com lists all the basics, such as acceptance rates, tuition costs, and academic majors.

00:03:41.500 But here's what makes this resource truly special.

00:03:43.840 christiancollegeguide.com will show you the school's faith commitments, its campus policies, and its spiritual life.

00:03:50.860 All the info that you will need to find the college you can trust.

00:03:54.400 This is the definitive college guide for Christian higher education, and it's completely free.

00:03:59.720 So if you or someone you know is considering college, go to christiancollegeguide.com to create a free user profile and start today.

00:04:07.660 It's christiancollegeguide.com.

00:04:09.880 So, Ian, before we jump into the main topic, I was wondering if you could maybe introduce yourself and provide some background.

00:04:17.180 Because I think you do some really interesting work.

00:04:19.560 In fact, it's funny because I just had a bunch of leftists yelling at me that I was citing YouTube videos and Stubstack articles when I wrote a book.

00:04:27.160 And it's like, well, actually, this is where the interesting work gets done. 0.82

00:04:30.720 Your academic citations are boring and stupid because the actual interesting work is being done in all of these different spaces. 0.76

00:04:38.600 So why are you doing serious academic work in a place like YouTube when, you know, obviously, traditionally, this is something you see from think tanks or universities, that kind of thing? 0.97

00:04:50.100 What brings you to doing this kind of work on this platform?

00:04:54.160 Oh, well, I was a graduate student and a doctoral student.

00:04:58.240 But I kind of got, I got extremely burned out by doctoral school in particular.

00:05:03.240 So I took a sabbatical.

00:05:04.500 And while I was on sabbatical, I just, my dad said I should do something because I was going insane, having nothing to do.

00:05:09.140 So I started doing YouTube.

00:05:10.080 And I found that, actually, it's a lot easier to reach people by talking to them, you know, via the internet, one-on-ones, or so it seems, right, you know, than it is to try and teach anything at a university course.

00:05:24.380 So, I mean, although I might one day want to go back to the university and to academia, this was a way I could do more freely what I wanted to do, which is just to actually find out the answers to questions or try to answer them to the best of my ability and share that information with other people.

00:05:38.180 And the internet is far better at doing that in many ways than our universities at this point.

00:05:44.300 Yeah, it's been my experience that when I speak to, especially right-wing academics, they tell me, actually, they just wish they were doing what, you know, you're doing right now.

00:05:54.040 Like, yeah, they tend to find that, you know, trying to struggle their way through the university system, its restrictions are already stifling for leftists.

00:06:03.080 But obviously, for anyone who has a different political orientation, it's even, you know, more so, and they find it almost impossible to actually get any real work done.

00:06:11.240 So many of them are watching people like you and others and saying, okay, that's kind of the model I want to go to now.

00:06:18.480 So I just think it's really interesting that at this point, in a way, the right has kind of created an alternative to university work or academic work that allows people who are promising, you know, who otherwise would have gotten lost in the system to be able to do interesting work like yourself.

00:06:34.640 So if people haven't checked out your videos, they most certainly should because they are all very, very deep dives, as I'm sure they're about to learn here.

00:06:41.620 All right, so let's start at the beginning of this problem, because as you said, there are some truth to the statement that right-wingers are at least more effective at violence.

00:06:54.080 However, there's a lot of different things buried in here.

00:06:57.400 I've seen other people discussing these studies say similar points about the selection criteria, that so often things are skewed because they're including prison violence.

00:07:09.060 They make sure to exclude other issues, and that tends, you know, if you just count the Aryan Brotherhood prison gang as a right-wing group, then all of a sudden your terrorism goes up quite quickly.

00:07:22.080 So can you speak a little bit, as you were saying there kind of at the beginning, what events are you looking at?

00:07:28.180 What specifically are you excluding that often is usually included?

00:07:31.680 And is there anything that you're excluding that you think other people are regularly including to skew the statistics?

00:07:38.140 So, again, the two sources are PIRIS, the Provenza Individual Radicalization in the United States Database, and the Global Terrorism Database.

00:07:47.540 PIRIS goes from, I believe, 1990 to 2019, or no, I'm sorry, 1947.

00:07:55.420 And then GDT, Global Terrorism Database, goes from 1975 to 2018, with the most recent versions of those two data sets that are available.

00:08:03.440 Now, that's a bit dated at this point, but those are the two that I had, and that should still, with a long enough time horizon, should be able to kind of give you an idea of patterns that might appear in those data.

00:08:13.920 And again, with the Global Terrorism Database, I compared it against the UK because I live in the British Isles, and they're very culturally similar in many ways.

00:08:22.520 So, if something were vastly different, that might be interesting to look at.

00:08:26.540 Instead, what I found was almost identical.

00:08:29.260 So, there is the problem with the inclusion criteria.

00:08:31.900 For example, right-wing violence comprises 59% of the included attacks as they are categorized by the people who put together PIRIS.

00:08:40.700 So, PIRIS data set says 59% of terrorist attacks since 1947 were committed by the right wing in the totality of the data set.

00:08:49.600 But the Global Terrorism Data Set, for the totality of it, so worldwide, it's 6% of terrorist attacks made since 1975 have been committed by the right.

00:08:59.120 That's a vast...

00:08:59.580 I'm sorry, how many did you say there? Did you say 6%?

00:09:01.960 6%.

00:09:02.560 Okay, that's quite a swing.

00:09:04.480 Yes. 6% globally versus 59% in the United States, on its face, is an insane difference.

00:09:12.180 So, first of all, I went... I tried to limit the amount of years I looked at.

00:09:16.420 So, I looked at 1990 to the most recent one, which is 2018, for both data sets.

00:09:22.460 There's been some more recent data from another data set that I looked at more recently that covers up until this year.

00:09:29.560 And does not, however, before the shooting of Charlie Kirk.

00:09:31.760 So, that was not included, nor some of the raids on ICE facilities, I think, because it went up to, I believe, September.

00:09:40.360 Was there a Center for Strategic Discourse, I think?

00:09:43.880 Was there data on that?

00:09:45.180 I'd have to... I have it in my notes here.

00:09:47.020 Center for Strategic something.

00:09:49.160 CIS, I know, is the acronym for it.

00:09:52.540 And that had actually the exact same sort of trend in the findings that I was seeing coming out of PIRIS and GTD.

00:09:58.620 So, but that, again, just prima facie, you can see that, like, there's a vast austerity in the way that data are handled and the way they're categorized.

00:10:06.660 So, I also went through and checked, because the fantastic thing about the global terrorism data set is that they've included in this, and it's massive, massive, like tens of thousands of rows in these data sets.

00:10:18.380 They have included, you know, all of the relevant information about a case, so that if there was something where I wasn't sure, I was unfamiliar with it, I didn't know, it was very easy to go back, trace it, and find out what this particular incident was, and agree or disagree with the way that the people who put together the two data sets may have categorized them.

00:10:36.880 So, I just did it manually.

00:10:37.760 Now, my manual categorization is potentially as biased as anyone else's, but this is a problem inherently when you're coding data, but I mostly aligned with the way that there was an analysis by Jasko is the name of the first author that was published in last year, or 2022.

00:10:56.180 They did an analysis of the same data sets, and my analysis almost entirely aligned with what they ended up concluding as well.

00:11:02.620 So, there was some external validity in terms of other scholars have gone through it and come up with very similar conclusions as to the coding.

00:11:10.800 What I found that no one had talked about, though, that's included in particularly the global terrorism data set, is that it contains information on foiled plots, and also contains information on death and injury rates.

00:11:23.080 And when you put those things all kind of together, a different picture about what is happening with violence, who commits it, and why, and who causes more death and injury, and why, became a little bit more clear.

00:11:35.580 Because it wasn't so much that the right is intrinsically or inherently vastly more violent.

00:11:40.600 In fact, leftist plots were slightly more likely to be uncovered and foiled before they even happened, which means that some of them are stopped before they can even make the attack.

00:11:48.900 And then when they do, they are significantly less likely to cause death or injury.

00:11:53.580 And I don't know, it was difficult when I was writing this, of how to explain that without saying skill issue.

00:11:59.640 Because, like, you know, it sounds awful.

00:12:03.740 It's good, yeah.

00:12:05.280 But that seemed to be sort of what it is.

00:12:07.260 They are planning violence.

00:12:08.620 And when you look in the rest of the video that I put out on it, I talked about the psychological mechanisms that are going on there, who expresses more violent intent in their thoughts, and it's the left by far.

00:12:18.800 They're far more violent in their intent.

00:12:20.260 I think most people who have ever interacted with any of them at this point, on the internet in particular, internet exacerbates things, hostilities at least, knows that these people are very aggressive.

00:12:29.960 And in fact, it was something like the far lefty tank subreddits were something like 47 times more aggressive and violent than the rest of Reddit.

00:12:36.560 So even the far lefties on Reddit are, like, 47 times more violent than the average Redditor.

00:12:43.260 So that's in their thoughts and words and actions and those kinds of things.

00:12:47.940 But they are at least, what I found from the two data sets, the amount of attacks are nearly the same.

00:12:53.840 But it's the severity of the attack and the outcome of the attack.

00:12:58.120 Again, more likely to be foiled, less likely to result in death, less likely to result in injury.

00:13:03.460 So it depends on the way that's always spun, and not unfairly, I'd say, is that the right is more violent.

00:13:10.640 And this year, 2025, is the first year from the Center for Strategic Discourse CIS data set that left-wing violence, terrorist attacks specifically, have surpassed right-wing ones ever.

00:13:22.560 As I think people may have noticed just from vibes outside of the actual way it's calculated.

00:13:27.700 So, in a way, this reminds me of the suicide statistics, right, that women attempt suicide far more often, that men are more successful at actually completing that.

00:13:41.680 So it's one of those scenarios where if you look at the raw data without the correct understanding, the correct context, it can make it seem, you know, the result's quite different there.

00:13:53.120 So that's very interesting that ultimately the big gap is not that one side is planning more attacks or even, you know, committing more attacks, but one is more successful once those attacks have ultimately been triggered.

00:14:08.680 Now, I guess you could say that competence in violence could therefore be construed as being more violent, but it's clearly not the intent of the left to be less violent. 0.95

00:14:18.180 They just suck at it.

00:14:19.100 Yeah, it's probably not the answer I think some people want to hear because it gives people good feelings to think, oh, no, you know, the right's not violent. 0.95

00:14:29.040 I don't know why you would want to think that, personally.

00:14:31.860 I don't know why you would want to think necessarily that your side is incompetent and incapable of violence if power and politics are inherently intertwined. 0.99

00:14:41.520 To think, to think, to say, oh, no, my side, people who agree with it politically are weak and pathetic.

00:14:46.800 Again, I'm not advocating violence or anything like that whatsoever, but it's interesting that there's this tendency to want to say, no, no, the right is not violent, is incapable of violence. 0.92

00:14:55.360 When they very much are, as is the left, the left is less capable, but as equal in its intent.

00:15:01.780 And political violence is a thing that will happen pretty much regardless to some extent.

00:15:06.180 I don't know how you would ever just excise that from society.

00:15:10.760 When people get very upset about something, and politics tends to do that, very often that takes the form of violent action.

00:15:17.880 Yeah, there is, it's very, America is a strange place, right?

00:15:23.880 Because in one sense, we are literally a country founded on the idea of political violence.

00:15:29.360 It's our founding story.

00:15:31.260 Things were so bad, we had to make the appeal to heaven.

00:15:34.340 We had to fight the British. 0.98

00:15:36.520 Now, I mean, if you look at what the complaints of the founders were in the Declaration of Independence,

00:15:42.960 they're about one-third or one-fourth as bad as literally what our government is doing to us today.

00:15:48.760 But, you know, the point is that that was the entire intent, was to say,

00:15:54.720 here, you know, the Declaration is a justification to the world of why we need to engage in political violence and be effective at it.

00:16:03.960 And so, obviously now, as you say, we decry political violence.

00:16:09.100 We can never have political violence.

00:16:10.660 And so there's this very difficult pattern of, in some ways, celebrating our own violent revolutionary past,

00:16:18.220 but also saying there's no situation today in which this would ever be justified.

00:16:23.920 Now, again, no one is advocating for anything here, but you are right that it's ultimately very bizarre

00:16:29.200 that that is the stance that a country that has founded itself in the justification for political violence

00:16:34.640 is ultimately taking with the action now.

00:16:37.240 Right. And I just don't think, based on, I mean, if you would like, if someone wants to argue it, be my guest,

00:16:43.180 the reality is that looking through the data, and again, knowing that these data have been selected for,

00:16:48.380 there are different groups have collated these data sets, both PIRIS and GTD.

00:16:53.200 I've gone over them. Again, there's massive differences, which there really shouldn't be,

00:16:56.700 but there are, just in the U.S. subsample of the data, of both data sets.

00:17:01.120 There are massive differences, something to be aware of.

00:17:04.140 But when I find a consistent trend, not just across the two data sets,

00:17:08.780 in terms of how, what is the characteristics of the data,

00:17:12.360 not just outside of, like, percentages and what's been included and what's not,

00:17:16.380 but what are the characteristics vis-a-vis, like, deaths and injury.

00:17:21.120 Similar characteristics there of left results in less death and injury, right,

00:17:25.660 tends to result in more death and injury.

00:17:28.280 That is consistent. It was also consistent in the U.K.

00:17:31.100 And that starts, when I start to see international similarities in the data sets,

00:17:35.720 and PIRIS, of course, only covers the U.S., but in global terrorism, there's both.

00:17:39.320 Now, I only looked at the U.S. and U.K.

00:17:41.240 If I had more time, I guess I could go through, you know, France and Canada, Australia,

00:17:45.480 at least the rest of the Anglosphere.

00:17:47.080 And France is usually interesting to look at as well with that kind of stuff.

00:17:51.180 But because I found it in both places, I thought, okay,

00:17:54.100 this seems consistent enough for me to say that there appears to be a trend here,

00:17:59.380 which is that the right is better at violence.

00:18:03.080 And it's hard to, I guess, express why you shouldn't run away from that as a concept.

00:18:08.300 And instead, lie or look desperately for statistics that say,

00:18:11.220 no, the right is far less violent and meek.

00:18:14.020 Well, and this bears out in other social science research.

00:18:18.700 So, for instance, Steve Saylor famously has his Saylor's Law,

00:18:23.360 which is if there's a mass shooting, you can count the percentage of shots fired

00:18:27.400 to people wounded or killed to know which race is actually perpetrating the shooting, right? 0.96

00:18:32.660 It's not that there's fewer shootings by blacks than whites. 0.52

00:18:38.920 But if you look at the ratio of death, you can kind of predict who actually was involved in that mass shooting.

00:18:45.780 Yeah, these data are sort of like a corollary to that hypothesis,

00:18:50.480 which does seem to very often bear out, is that, yeah, when white people and when right-wing leaning people

00:18:58.540 or people who are inspired to violence for right-leaning causes,

00:19:01.860 and the way that these data sets work, too, is that they assign them to known terrorist group affiliation,

00:19:08.540 which is another layer on it that kind of may or may not add validity or take it away,

00:19:12.840 depending on how you feel about it, and on individual cases.

00:19:15.860 For example, the KKK violence, that's another reason why I kept it post-1990,

00:19:20.540 because there hasn't been a lynching since 1990.

00:19:22.460 I think 1989 was the last one, or 81.

00:19:24.560 It's been a while.

00:19:25.900 But that helped cut out a lot of the, I would say, potentially quite erroneous KKK data,

00:19:30.640 knowing about any affiliations of people, real affiliations,

00:19:34.480 a federal operative interference, and just nixing all of that as a potential confound and keeping it since 1990.

00:19:43.040 But you could make that argument about all kinds of different terrorist cells.

00:19:46.820 People believe, oh, you know, this terrorist cell isn't real.

00:19:49.560 It's, you know, funded by this or that government, intentionally designed.

00:19:52.840 So maybe that all is true.

00:19:54.820 I don't know.

00:19:55.240 I just looked at the data as they were and didn't try to mess with it too much or recategorize anything.

00:20:00.480 Just let it sit as it was, with the caveats in mind that these data sets are valuable.

00:20:05.360 I found errors in both of them in terms of reporting.

00:20:08.180 They had listed one group called Project 7 as responsible for a bunch of bombings or bomb attempts.

00:20:14.220 And then I went and looked into it, and they were cleared of that well over a decade ago.

00:20:17.400 And it's still in the modern data set, just as one example.

00:20:20.200 But there's tons of errors like that.

00:20:21.640 However, again, consistency in valence and trend, consistency across nations, seems to indicate there might be a consistency to the behavior.

00:20:32.280 Interesting also the way that these things get categorized because of the way different groups organize, right?

00:20:37.720 So you'd have, I guess, just general urban gangs, and that would not be considered political violence, even if they are at like a BLM rally or something like that.

00:20:49.260 However, you get something like Proud Boys, and that is immediately considered to be a political organization, even if it's officially organized under something like a fraternal structure.

00:20:59.360 And so the way that right-wing, quote-unquote, I guess, demography would end up getting coded is political whenever it actually organizes.

00:21:10.040 As where left-wing demography, it's hit and miss as to whether those things are considered political once they organize into violent groups.

00:21:18.180 Yeah, another beneficial thing.

00:21:21.180 But to be clear, the terrorist data set, or using the terrorist databases and terrorism data, is essentially a snapshot of it.

00:21:29.240 Because you can't, it doesn't include that things like, you know, the various amounts of violence from rioting and from looting and from many, all the things that went on under BLM or during the height of BLM, that stuff's not included.

00:21:43.940 So it's just planned and completed or planned and failed terrorist attacks from known groups in both instances.

00:21:52.720 A peerist is a little, has individuals as well, as the name implies, but it's linked with a certain ideology or group.

00:22:00.840 So that's, it's a little snapshot of a way of trying to look at who actually is committing more violence.

00:22:06.760 It's not a totalizing report.

00:22:09.140 What I looked at was just like this one little area that I was able to isolate out and say in this, because it was, I started looking at it after, of course, the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

00:22:17.060 And it was, in that case, that was a, I mean, I would consider that a terrorist attack in some degree, but there's no affiliated group there.

00:22:25.200 So they, that, that particular incident would not end up being included, either probably in GTD or in Paris.

00:22:31.300 Well, we have the problem that, for instance, again, even the FBI directors have said things like, well, Antifa is just an idea.

00:22:38.460 It's not a real group, right?

00:22:39.960 So even, even in cases where you literally have a named group with Facebook pages and organization and funding and networks, these aren't considered political terror groups for some reason.

00:22:53.580 Interesting that, you know, originally I thought that your, the 2020 riots just wouldn't be included due to the dates that you were giving for the span of, of your data sets.

00:23:02.440 But you're saying that even if they had reached in 2020 and beyond, they would not have included any of the Summer of Love, BLM riots, Antifa.

00:23:10.280 None of this would have counted as political violence.

00:23:13.380 Not for this, because they are looking at terrorist attacks.

00:23:17.520 So it has to have been planned to some degree and carried out or attempted to be carried out.

00:23:22.720 And if it was not carried out, then be identified and foiled.

00:23:26.360 Those are the only things that are included, which again makes it of any data set you look at is going to have limited utility because you can't look at everything all of the time without too many variables getting too involved.

00:23:39.840 And then you've got a very complete model, but it becomes very difficult to pick out what is contributing what to the full model fit.

00:23:45.720 So it's like trying to explain, well, how much is the automobile industry adding to CO2 levels in the atmosphere that contribute to global warming, pulling that apart, that apart from all other emissions from the natural, you know, warming and cooling process of the planet, it becomes impossible.

00:24:03.380 So you can try to look at little snapshots of data.

00:24:06.660 And so for terrorism, as recognized by these two data sets that come from two statistical analysis groups, when there's such consistency, it's at least, I guess, interesting to point out because there's so many, I guess, misconceptions about who does violence, why, and why is there this claim out there that the right is so much more violent and so much more prone towards terrorism, for example.

00:24:30.800 It's not completely based in reality, it's just a little bit more nuanced than I think most people ever dig deeper than they would, you know, they don't want to go past surface value, surface level, because then you might have some answers or rationales or things that might explain it that are a little bit uncomfortable for those just wanting to look at the rights more violent or why.

00:24:54.460 Yeah, I think we've already tripped over a few of those, but okay, so we have the general understanding that it's not that the right is necessarily more prolific in its violence, so much as it is more successful in its violence.

00:25:10.340 That's something you see consistently, not just in the United States, but like you said, across different countries.

00:25:16.180 What other insights did you glean from your deep dive into the data?

00:25:20.020 I'm trying to think of what else was particular, that was the big finding.

00:25:25.300 There were some of the other things, there's the, I went into all the psychology behind it as well, and some of the psychology stuff that was more interesting about what, what is justifying the violence, and where does that come from?

00:25:36.380 I started to look at morals, at people's moral frameworks, and you know, like the trolley problem and stuff, and what I found with different moral dilemmas, and what I found very consistently, across all of the studies that have been done on it, is that people who lean to the left have an outgroup preference, as everyone sort of knows now from the memetic weights at all analysis, the heat map meme,

00:25:55.200 which they deny constantly, despite that being like one measure, there's about a dozen different psychometric instruments that measure essentially that, and it's consistent on all of them.

00:26:05.620 But it's the same thing where they have outgroup preference, they will sacrifice the life of a white person, before they will sacrifice the life of a black person, or a brown person, or a person of another religion or ethnicity, etc.

00:26:18.180 They also have this, when they have this thing called outgroup fusion, which they tend to get, which is not feeling like you were fused with your in-group, as people tend to be, I am an American, I am, you know, this, that, or the other, and there's some shared group homophily, we are the same, in some way.

00:26:36.380 They don't have that, to the same degree, they have this very strange oppositional thing called outgroup identity fusion, where, you know, the free Palestine people are a perfect example of this.

00:26:47.540 They care about Palestine, they care about Ukraine so much, places they didn't know existed until it became a media buzz.

00:26:54.100 Those people in particular have, when they have that outgroup identity fusion, which are predominantly leftists who feel that way, are far more likely to say that they would be willing to fight, die, and sacrifice and give up their lives for the cause, than people who have in-group identity fusion, fusion with shared nation, fusion with shared ethnicity, shared race.

00:27:14.620 People who have outgroup, they prefer other racial groups outside of their own racial group, other ethnic groups, other national groups, those people are more likely to say they would fight, die, and self-sacrifice for the cause of the outgroup.

00:27:29.460 Which is funny, because I feel like that's not true at all, right?

00:27:33.480 It's something they would say, but I think you put it to practice.

00:27:37.320 It's not just that left-wingers are incompetent in violence, but it's been my experience, you know, when I'm speaking with people, that left-wingers are just completely unfamiliar with the realities of violence.

00:27:49.600 They have this Marvel movie understanding of the way that violence works, as where conservatives tend to be a little more, they know, if they haven't been in the military or police, they know people who are in those professions, they're more likely to have done, you know, some kind of martial arts or something.

00:28:04.500 Like, they're just familiar with the realities of what fighting or being in a combat actually does, as where leftists are like, well, yeah, of course I'd go up and beat, like, I've talked to totally delusional people who are, like, wildly out of shape and have no skills at all, or, like, the weakest people in the world.

00:28:23.300 And they're just like, yeah, I'm gonna go out and fight these Nazis. I used to do that all the time. It's like, no, man, I know you didn't. Like, there's no, you are, you are as soft as butter, man. Like, there is zero chance you have fought a single fight in your entire life, much less that you're going out, you know, doing battle with skinheads. Like, but, but they really do. They go, they go around and talk about, like, this is something I would absolutely involve myself in, even though there's no connection to reality there.

00:28:47.400 Oh, yeah. I've seen that, of course, myself as well. It's very pervasive. But it's indicative, though, that they are thinking about this. They're ruminating about violence quite a lot. And to excessive degrees in the way that the right doesn't, the rumination on violence. Sometimes rumination can cause to action, can lead to action, not inherently.

00:29:07.960 But again, where you find the disconnect, then, is that when they do have to make that move from thought or feelings into action, they can't manifest the outcome that they want. And I think the, the recent shooting was at Texas, at the Dallas, Dallas ice facility, where Shaw was trying to, you know, shoot ice agents and ended up shooting and killing, I think, three, the detainees.

00:29:31.200 Yeah. Which was, it happened when I was working on reading all these data. And I was like, oh, my God, well, there it is. I mean, that's a perfect exemplar of that. That if they finally, I think maybe some of them do recognize that they're not capable of doing violence, which may prevent them from doing it. They don't have a familiarity with it. There was a very funny clip that went around maybe like 10 years ago now of a games journalist having to hold up a virtual firearm in VR headset and started crying about it.

00:29:58.160 So I think there's a big disconnect there. They ruminate again, think about how all the violence they want to commit. And in their heads, it's, they're very, I think, convinced of it. But then when you have to transfer from those thoughts into actions, and then actually going and doing it, there's a big disconnect. And hence why they're not as good at it. They're not as skilled at accomplishing violence and enacting violence than the right tends to be.

00:30:23.520 Yeah, I mean, I'm not going to claim any kind of incredible expertise, but I've, you know, a lifetime of shooting at the range and been in a lot of different training scenarios and that kind of thing. And it's just always bizarre, because again, I've worked with brand new shooters, people who have never touched a gun. I've worked with experts, guys who earn their living shooting guns. And when you look at those different training scenarios, and then you watch some of these videos that people will do about like,

00:30:52.520 their leftist gun club getting together, we're worried about the homophobes. Now we're worried about the transphobes, we got to protect us. And we're gonna learn and you watch these people. And it's like, they can't get one guy in the room, to help them, like, just learn, like how to handle a gun. It's honestly terrifying. Like, I can actually feel my anxiety for them when I see them trying to train because they just like they're flagging each other with firearms constantly there. They have no clue how to operate. It's just bizarre. It's like watching children who like maybe got all of

00:31:22.500 their information on an operating gun from a Jason Bourne movie, like trying to get at the range. And it's just, it's, it's terrifying sometimes.

00:31:29.580 Oh, yeah. Yeah, I've seen a lot of those videos. What was it? I don't remember the name of which one was it? John Brown, a gun club? That's their big one. And sometimes they'll put up videos of them training. And yes, it's a bit, a bit sad. But I think that that is the kind of, I wasn't surprised once, you know, I go see it in the data. It's like, okay, well, that makes all this stuff make more sense.

00:31:51.860 They are sitting there ruminating. They think about violence, at least as much. And then again, looking into it, it seems far more often, they're constantly thinking about violence, but they don't have the tools or the skills. I don't, it's not the motive. They definitely have the motive to do it. They don't have the skills to do it. And that's a good thing, I suppose.

00:32:11.240 I think it's actually a positive thing that these people are not capable of violence. It seems that many people on the right in my, just, you know, interacting in the milieu seem to want these people to be more directly violent.

00:32:24.600 I think the fact that they are kind of pathetic and unorganized might be a good thing. And people want that to have a bogeyman to fight against. And just that they don't want the right to be violent in any way. And I think, you know, maybe the data are all wrong. 0.94

00:32:38.580 It's possible these data sets are completely skewed and BS. And I mean, I did go through them to check that they were largely correct, but it's totally possible because of things that are left out, for example, that they are BS.

00:32:51.280 But from what I was able to pull from the potentially flawed, and again, I know they are flawed, as I point out, data sets, it's not an issue of the right is more or less violent.

00:33:02.960 They're just more capable of actually, when they set out to cause harm, to actually cause harm.

00:33:09.700 Well, I mean, I certainly don't want the left to be better at violence, to be fair.

00:33:13.360 But I do think there is this, there is a certain aspect of this, I've spoken about it before, where the fact that the left is so cartoonishly inept with violence, kind of lulls people into a false sense of security, because they don't take that violence seriously.

00:33:31.060 In fact, I made this exact reference when we were talking about, you know, shooting the detainees instead of the ICE agents.

00:33:38.140 If the Antifa terrorist had murdered three ICE agents that day, I think we'd be looking at a very different scenario, right?

00:33:45.800 I think there would be a much different level of seriousness when it comes to the Trump administration, the way they're cracking down, the way that the public ultimately is responding.

00:33:54.060 You know, I think there's a reason that people had a much more visceral reaction to that National Guard soldier being killed, as opposed to, you know, just a random shot going by somewhere.

00:34:05.780 And so, of course, again, I wish she was not dead.

00:34:08.840 I do not want the left to be more effective at this.

00:34:10.740 But I do think there is this kind of slow boiling of the frog that occurs because leftists are so inept that you're like, ah, okay, another one, like, it's kind of like Wile E. Coyote, you know, as long as he misses the roadrunner most of the time, it's a harmless cartoon.

00:34:24.980 But the one time he catches the roadrunner, it's not so funny anymore, right?

00:34:28.640 I think that's kind of the situation.

00:34:30.580 It lulls people into this idea that, well, yes, the left is violent, but they're like toddlers, you know, swinging at my knee.

00:34:36.440 You know, it's not real violence.

00:34:37.720 Well, I mean, I think that's why Charlie Kirk's assassination was so shocking to people.

00:34:43.740 Because, I mean, they took two swipes at Trump and didn't manage to kill him.

00:34:48.540 And at least for me, the way that when Charlie Kirk was assassinated, I thought there was no way he's dead because, I mean, they keep missing Trump.

00:34:56.080 So there's no way they hit him.

00:34:58.060 But and it does maybe lull people into a false sense of security.

00:35:01.260 But I think the thing that I tried to be clear about in my videos is exactly is that these people are extremely violent in their thoughts just because they're incapable or not incapable, just because they're incompetent doesn't mean they are inherently not capable of being capable.

00:35:17.860 They can. And if there's enough of them and because at this point, like I've said, the most recent data show that, well, this year, 2025 is the first year that leftist violence in the United States, at least as of the data collection set for at least the last 30 years, has surpassed right wing violence.

00:35:33.360 And significantly so. It's about five times higher this year.

00:35:36.960 Now it's by five. So I think it's like one to zero to five.

00:35:41.080 It might be one now. It's in the single digits of the ones that were categorized by that particular data set, the Strategic Institute study.

00:35:50.500 But if it's that much higher than the right.

00:35:54.600 And what I also found is that if you look at it over time, if there's a year where there's more right wing violent attacks, terrorist attacks, the next year there'll be more left wing violent attacks.

00:36:03.360 And it happens cyclically and in response to one another. And it was that way, looking at it back since 1947 and since 1975, you have one year more right wing violence.

00:36:12.620 The next year is more left wing violence. Next year, more right wing violence. Back and forth forever.

00:36:16.940 So right now, if 2025, once the data, you know, finished coming out on it, and it's true that the left has finally surpassed the right in terms of terrorist attacks, it means the amount of violence in intent.

00:36:30.140 This is not necessarily true, but it seems to be implied or to some level, the violent intent that's going on in these communities has to be extremely high for them to succeed at this many as they have.

00:36:40.260 So these people are on edge and they must be for them to finally surpass the right.

00:36:48.240 Well, and you're right that there's a certain level of an inference here, but I think it's an educated one.

00:36:53.180 When you look again at the response to Charlie Kirk's death, I think as bad as Charlie Kirk's death was, for a lot of people, the response was the really chilling thing.

00:37:02.920 Because rather than turn around and say collectively, we don't do this. This is evil. This has to stop.

00:37:09.220 We all looked. And yeah, some leftists did the, well, you know, you shouldn't do that. Violence is always bad.

00:37:16.100 But just below the surface of pretty much everybody on the left was this, well, I wouldn't have killed him, but he had it coming.

00:37:24.300 And this is just what you deserve. And when you see that as kind of the unified opinion of the left, not just the radicals, not just the extremists, but the average politician, the average news commentator, your neighbor.

00:37:37.880 When you see that, like that really tells you how, as you're saying that whole left wing, even if these people are disjointed and incompetent and, you know, generally not as good at this, when there's that level of resentment built up on the entire left, you know, as you say, that the intensity is building and building and building.

00:37:58.280 And that becomes increasingly terrifying. And it's interesting because this mirrors, I think, in more of the political science realm, something that we've worked with and kind of neo-reactionary thought, which is this idea that ultimately the left is the kind of the party or the movement of kind of gradual wins, right?

00:38:18.800 Like they have this kind of constant entropic thing working for them. They don't need to be organized. They don't need to be centralized. They don't need to be necessarily effective because like the natural gradient of politics is that they're kind of unorganized violence or unorganized efforts are going to slowly wear away.

00:38:36.840 And it's only when the right finally gets fed up and centralizes and becomes unified, they flip a switch immediately, right?

00:38:44.920 The left is kind of always violent, kind of simmering, but bad at it. And then the right eventually gets fed up and just says, now we effectively come in and just crush this, right?

00:38:54.200 Yes. And I covered a study that looked at exactly that too, or some analysis of data. And it was that normally when there is a conservative or right wing leading person in power in a society, there is less right wing violence. That isn't the case in the opposite, in reverse. When there's a left wing leader in power, no, there's not less. It continues. They continue to just, yes, be angry all of the time.

00:39:20.320 There's no pressure valve that switches off for them. It just is always building seemingly, at least, you know, as of the last 30 to 40, 50 years, depending on the country.

00:39:30.620 Because I also looked at data out of South America on that. And it also depended on whether or not people were supportive of terrorist activities, supportive of, you know, watching a terrorist action occur, whether or not they were supportive of that also was dependent on who was in power.

00:39:44.940 And, you know, if there was a left wing group in power, then people were actually more supportive of left wing violence. But when a right wing group was in power, they weren't more supportive of right wing terrorist violence.

00:39:56.440 So it seems that being in power gives people who are broadly on the left a sense that, oh, now is our chance. We'll take all of it. We'll take more and more, get more violent.

00:40:07.440 And the right instead goes, OK, we've got power now. Let's back off.

00:40:12.260 Now, obviously, there's a certain level of speculation here. But again, I think it's well supported.

00:40:16.660 You know, thinking about that topic, you spoke about that out group preference on the left.

00:40:21.540 And one of the things about having an out group preference is you have basically declared war on your own in group, right?

00:40:28.060 That is implicit in that is that you've rejected your own in group for that out group, which means in my mind, you feel constantly under siege, right?

00:40:36.300 Because you are surrounded by definition by a group you do not align with and you feel that you are willing to reach out to what would otherwise be a hostile group and kind of leverage them back against your own in group.

00:40:49.340 And so I feel like that is why, to some extent, leftists are more constantly angered, working towards violence.

00:40:57.660 They find themselves in this just basically, you know, war against all, you know, because of the way that they view the world, the fact that they have eschewed their in group for the out group as where right wingers, once kind of their guys in power, they can relax.

00:41:12.360 They're not in war with everyone around them, right?

00:41:14.760 As where a left winger comes to power, they're just like, and now the revolution can really begin and let's get rid of that in group.

00:41:21.780 And that was exactly what I found in the research on it as well, is that, yeah, it's not, they're not identical in that way.

00:41:28.200 The left pushes for more power.

00:41:29.740 When they get a little bit, they push harder than ever.

00:41:31.860 That's when they get actually sometimes the most violent.

00:41:34.080 The right, when they get into power, they back off massively.

00:41:37.100 And it's even just having support, I found that in analysis of European countries, that when there was a right wing populist party, right wing support for violent activism of any sort just plummeted.

00:41:48.160 They had one, you know, there's a little bit of right wing populist representation, and it fell through the floor comparatively to basically any other country that didn't have right wing populist representation.

00:41:58.780 But that wasn't the case for left wing populist representation, whatever that really means, how they categorize that.

00:42:04.000 But it was only the case for right wing ones.

00:42:08.040 So, you know, and again, I'm not sure if this is in your wheelhouse, but when we look at that choice of out group preference, okay, we can understand why in group preference exists.

00:42:19.500 I feel like that's pretty obvious that there's an evolutionary advantage for binding together and creating this.

00:42:25.700 And, you know, I've seen other guys like Ed Dutton talk about why something like Christianity was one of the most powerful weapons in kind of making the West what it was because it allowed for you to scale up in group preference.

00:42:41.600 You had a new way to still keep the upsides of in group preference while expanding it to more and more people and getting the benefit at scale.

00:42:51.140 So what would be the advantage ultimately of out group preference?

00:42:56.960 Why would people choose that strategy for survival?

00:43:01.000 Is it just the weak and the outcasts that are like, you know, looking for something else?

00:43:05.520 I don't feel like that's true of many liberals.

00:43:08.300 They're often rich and these other aspects that mean they probably don't need, you know, to bring in like some kind of foreign power to defend them against the in group.

00:43:17.520 So why choose that strategy?

00:43:20.880 You know, I'm not really sure why they do because there isn't any strong evolutionary rationale to do that, except it might be perpetual in group victimhood orientation, which is a scale that has is very lacking in further analysis or something related to that, which is that one thing that you find across the people who identify as left is that they all seem to also be victims or very highly identify with victims.

00:43:43.500 They see themselves as victims in their own lives, almost unilaterally.

00:43:48.120 It's such a consistent theme in one way or another.

00:43:50.400 They've been victimized.

00:43:51.140 They've been victimized by society, by capitalism, by, you know, racism, sexism, homophobia.

00:43:58.380 Every single one has has a victim status.

00:44:01.840 And I think that that appears to be a thing that binds them together.

00:44:05.760 So I guess it's and in some of the very little research that's been done on perpetual in group victimhood orientation, which has been done in Israel, because you certainly have two, two groups there that both think they are perpetual victims.

00:44:19.100 One may have stronger claims to that than others, but than the other.

00:44:22.260 But I won't make it spicy by asking you which one.

00:44:26.040 But, you know, whatever you make of that, clearly both sides think they are victims.

00:44:33.260 And so you have a very interesting environment to study it in, study it in.

00:44:37.700 And when people think that they are victims and they have a legitimate claim to being a victim, they think that they deserve to be given things.

00:44:46.460 They think that they're owed all of this stuff.

00:44:48.320 They have to be bowed down to.

00:44:49.420 They have to be listened to because it's their right as victims.

00:44:51.840 I mean, and they're owed that by other people.

00:44:56.160 So if you have one thing that that does appear to tie most much of the left together is this perception of being victimized in some way.

00:45:03.120 And so that might be it, is that I am owed these things.

00:45:06.020 I do these things because of my victim status with people who you otherwise would have nothing in common with.

00:45:11.220 But we're all victims together under capitalism or whatever, you know.

00:45:15.560 Right.

00:45:16.600 Well, I think this is a fascinating study.

00:45:19.720 I'm glad that you dove into this because I have had this discussion in my own personal life, you know, and I and I and I, of course, knew that there was a lot more to this.

00:45:28.160 And I had inferred several of the problems that you're talking about.

00:45:31.800 But having that analysis is very useful, of course.

00:45:35.300 And you do a lot of great work with social science.

00:45:38.460 Again, people should go check out your work so they can get that background that you're not even getting in academia sometimes.

00:45:45.340 Before we go to the questions of the people, where can people find your work right now?

00:45:51.220 Yeah, it's Aiden Paladin on YouTube, A-Y-D-I-N, P-A-L-A-D-I-N.

00:45:56.740 And I've got a new video coming up on myths about the psychology of Christmas.

00:46:00.800 That'll be done before Christmas.

00:46:02.640 Everyone thinks that Christmas is like or not everyone thinks.

00:46:05.200 I guess many do now that Christmas is miserable.

00:46:07.780 It's the worst time of the year.

00:46:08.840 We're actually, we've been lied to that Christmas is a good time of year.

00:46:13.000 Oh, and go, you know, don't go home because you'll fight with your conservative family.

00:46:16.180 And in fact, avoid them, cut them out.

00:46:19.120 All of that's fake.

00:46:20.020 All of it.

00:46:21.340 Almost everything about Christmas being depressing and the worst time of the year and everyone, you know, tops themselves.

00:46:26.380 All of it's, it's just not in the data whatsoever. 0.99

00:46:29.200 Complete, complete made up crap. 0.95

00:46:31.940 So that'll be fun. 0.97

00:46:33.060 That'll be out soon if you want to watch that as well. 0.95

00:46:34.940 My theory, I have not seen the video, of course, but my theory is that Hollywood is full of narcissistic misanthropes who hate their families and hate America.

00:46:44.960 And so they just pour all of that rage and guilt and anger into their work.

00:46:49.680 And because that's what people consume about Christmas, they just believe that even though that's not their actual experience.

00:46:55.000 Yeah, it sure seems that way.

00:46:56.340 I hope I didn't just spoil it.

00:46:57.320 Sorry.

00:46:57.700 Oh, no, no, no.

00:46:59.380 I think he could have probably figured it out.

00:47:01.640 But yes, that is more or less what I believe is going on as well.

00:47:04.940 All right.

00:47:05.660 Well, guys, make sure that you're checking out Aiden's work, even if I'm spoiling it.

00:47:09.440 And then let's go over to your questions here.

00:47:12.500 Let's see.

00:47:13.060 We've got Quizox Chatterack says, thanks, Aiden.

00:47:17.180 And Aiden Paladin.

00:47:18.400 Thanks, man.

00:47:19.820 We got Quartz saying, it would be interesting to see how they would file Islamic terrorism or pro-monarchist anti-American paramilitary units in Canada.

00:47:31.180 Not the same side.

00:47:31.880 But yeah, actually, I did mean to ask you about that.

00:47:34.440 So obviously, we look at, let's say, something like religious terrorism, right?

00:47:39.720 You get some kind of Islamic terrorism. 0.67

00:47:41.860 People would right-wing code that because it's religious at some level.

00:47:47.400 But obviously, Islam, you know, Muslims tend to vote Democrat.

00:47:52.260 They tend to be part of the Democrat coalition.

00:47:54.120 So if we get an Islamic terrorist attack, is that right-wing violence coded in most of these or left-wing?

00:47:59.420 Well, I can tell you how I had an easy way of getting around that.

00:48:02.360 I just categorized Islamic terror as its own thing. 1.00

00:48:05.660 Oh, OK.

00:48:06.480 So I just removed.

00:48:07.240 I just took the rule because it is its own thing, I think.

00:48:11.220 Sure.

00:48:11.440 Because for the exact reasons you just stated, they tend to vote Democrat.

00:48:15.880 But then, you know, some people say, well, they're very religious.

00:48:18.340 They're conservative.

00:48:19.200 They're, you know, culturally conservative.

00:48:21.420 So I said, well, just cut them out of it.

00:48:24.780 So that's, yeah, sorry.

00:48:25.680 I should have been more clear about that beforehand.

00:48:26.920 I just removed Islamic terror because also you can't even see the rest of the data if you include Islamic terror.

00:48:33.640 I have a graph of it.

00:48:35.140 And when you look at the death and injury accounts, it's just this massive, massive toll bar.

00:48:40.320 And then you can't even see left and right on it.

00:48:42.780 It's not you cannot represent it visually.

00:48:45.360 So, yeah, I cut them out.

00:48:46.620 Which is why both of our countries need to expel these people and put bans on their entry. 0.97

00:48:51.420 But it is interesting, you know, this is another problem, I think, ultimately with assuming that the sides are ideological, right?

00:49:00.160 These political coalitions, Muslims are not in the leftist political coalition because they agree with the leftists. 0.97

00:49:06.940 I mean, you look at black Americans.

00:49:08.660 They're some of the most culturally conservative people in the U.S., but they are also the most likely to vote for the Democrats.

00:49:16.760 This idea that there's natural conservatives with natural conservative values.

00:49:20.820 No, actually, over and over again, what we see is the people who have the values vote for the left because the left is the party of taking stuff from people who are Americans and giving it to new people.

00:49:30.380 It has nothing to do with your ideology.

00:49:32.520 Yes.

00:49:32.720 I also excluded stuff that was explicitly anti-government because or I put it in its own block and then ran a different analysis on that because what is anti-government depends on what the government is.

00:49:45.060 Is Ted Kisinski right wing?

00:49:46.340 Is he left wing?

00:49:47.120 Is he environmentalist?

00:49:47.300 I didn't want to deal with the Ted question.

00:49:48.960 And so, you know, so I got out the stuff that was like wholly anarchistic or just anti-government in one way or another that wasn't ideological to help make it a little clearer.

00:50:01.380 Elijah Tymon says, how should I respond to young men who express the reluctance of the right to engage in violence is why we've been losing for the last century?

00:50:10.400 Well, I'll say this, man, you're in a scenario where you have control of the government, at least theoretically.

00:50:18.380 Right. And so this is why, for instance, after the response to Charlie Kirk's assassination, I said, we need to see as much action as possible under the color of law from the Trump administration.

00:50:33.800 Right. There is great power in operating under the color of law, especially when you are conservative.

00:50:39.240 We are the side of order. The right is the side of law and order.

00:50:43.500 We want things to be done orderly.

00:50:45.020 That doesn't mean violence doesn't occur.

00:50:46.880 Right. As my friend John Doyle says, very cool and very legal, you know, elimination of the left.

00:50:53.060 Right. Like we it's not that we don't want it done.

00:50:55.400 We just want it done in an orderly fashion.

00:50:57.280 We want people standing in lines. OK, so, you know, that that's that's really, I think, key.

00:51:02.960 I'm never I'm not going to tell you that you need to be involved in violence, but I'm also not going to tell anyone that there, as we've discussed with the American Revolution, there is just like never this point at which violence is an option.

00:51:14.540 Right. Like at some point when you're coming for me and my family and my kids, what not violence is the option.

00:51:19.540 Violence is the moral option. Right.

00:51:21.640 And so this idea that there's just never justified political violence is not true.

00:51:27.240 Like at some point, you know, it's OK to stop the communists, even if it's under Franco.

00:51:32.380 Right. So that's kind of always been my position.

00:51:35.320 But right now, that's not where you're at.

00:51:37.380 You're in a situation where a guy who can wield the violence of the state against your political enemies exists.

00:51:44.260 So put your energy towards making that happen rather than getting yourself in trouble and creating extrajudicial scenarios.

00:51:50.860 Yes. Yes. Do not crime is what my friend says.

00:51:54.260 So do not do not crime.

00:51:56.100 Yes. Everything very legal and very cool.

00:51:58.800 Yes. Shaker Silver says might need to get ahead of Lindsay types using the Candace crash shot as an I told you so against the right that wants to win and not cut to the system. 1.00

00:52:10.680 I mean, honestly, at this point, I don't I haven't even even seen James talking about this.

00:52:17.020 I it's irrelevant. I know somewhere in the void he's firing off messages, but I Candace Owens behavior is currently, I think, bad.

00:52:27.600 I think we can kind of generally decry that. I think we just point that out and move on.

00:52:31.780 We don't have to give any credit to anyone that it's easy for us that disagree with James to point out that she has behavior as it is for him to point that out.

00:52:40.820 So let's just all point that out and not give him any air.

00:52:44.400 Agree. Yes.

00:52:47.620 Sherry Coke Nixon says yet another near Democrat sweep last night.

00:52:51.740 Where is the right focus? Conspiracy nonsense and Trump denying political reality.

00:52:55.380 Thanks, Owens et al.

00:52:56.680 And again, you know, this is, I think, a big problem for the right.

00:53:01.980 As soon as as Hayden pointed out here, the left, when they get power, they want more power.

00:53:06.860 When the right gets a little bit of power, they decide now is the time to get in a circular firing squad.

00:53:13.260 As much as I need to, I will point out people who are causing problems on the right and keeping us from winning.

00:53:18.640 But I really want my focus ultimately to be on defeating the left right now.

00:53:22.060 We don't have a lot of time left with the momentum that we need to make things happen.

00:53:26.220 And that's really where I want my focus to be. 0.99

00:53:29.000 So, yes, there's a lot of stupid stuff going on. 1.00

00:53:31.200 I'll acknowledge it's stupid. 1.00

00:53:32.200 I'll point out it's stupid. 1.00

00:53:33.140 But I'm going to go back to saying we need to defeat the left. 0.99

00:53:35.760 That's where I'm keeping my focus right now.

00:53:38.140 Yeah.

00:53:40.080 And the Shade Master says, can Aiden tell us what the Las Vegas shooter was categorized as?

00:53:45.600 Oh, I just didn't deal with it.

00:53:47.380 I just cut it out.

00:53:48.500 Who knows?

00:53:49.560 No one knows.

00:53:50.100 It's so bizarre.

00:53:51.340 There were a couple of cases like that where I knew the case.

00:53:55.800 It was very clear.

00:53:57.400 It didn't fit nicely into anything.

00:54:00.620 And again, my analysis of the data are going to be flawed because the data are flawed and

00:54:05.840 because everyone's going to have to come to some sort of decision when you do an analysis

00:54:09.440 like that to say, well, where does what fit where?

00:54:11.920 And even so, you could know everything that there is to know about a particular case and

00:54:16.280 that not really be the motive that was going on in someone's head because you can't,

00:54:20.060 you know, it's metaphysically absurd.

00:54:22.040 You can't ever really, really know what was driving someone, I suppose.

00:54:25.080 It could always be an elaborate ploy, I guess.

00:54:27.380 But consistent, consistent across time, consistent across countries, consistent in for all these

00:54:34.080 different types of groups, whether they be environmental and animal rights activists or

00:54:37.860 BLM anti-white activists, which are astonishingly included in those data sets, they call them 0.99

00:54:43.180 anti-white.

00:54:44.120 I was shocked by that.

00:54:45.640 But that was a bit of a surprise.

00:54:48.480 It didn't matter what kind of leftist group, same sort of pattern of behavior.

00:54:54.140 Just as likely to do an attack, less likely to kill and injure.

00:54:57.180 And MajorMetroid says, what happened to the Broken Crown podcast?

00:55:03.300 I'm here and said, we'll do it tomorrow.

00:55:05.940 I left a community note, so we'll be back tomorrow at the same time, 7.30 p.m. GMT.

00:55:12.320 Yeah, I didn't think about the fact that I was doing my classic move of individually inviting

00:55:16.500 two halves of a podcast on slowly.

00:55:19.200 I did that with the good old boys, and I've done that with CJ and them over at, you know,

00:55:26.920 like I've done that with several podcasts, so glad I could complete the set on this one

00:55:30.740 as well, have both of you on.

00:55:33.180 All right, well, it has been fantastic to talk with you, Aiden.

00:55:35.600 As always, people, please go check out her work if you have not done so yet.

00:55:40.260 And of course, if it's your first time on this channel, you need to click subscribe on YouTube,

00:55:44.500 the bell, the notification, you know what to do.

00:55:46.520 And of course, if you want to get these broadcasts as podcasts, then you need to go to your favorite

00:55:51.700 podcast platform and subscribe to The Orr McIntyre Show.

00:55:55.580 When you do, leave a rating or review.

00:55:57.440 It helps with the algorithm magic.

00:55:59.280 Thank you, everybody, for watching.

00:56:00.320 And as always, I will talk to you next time.

The Auron MacIntyre Show - December 10, 2025

Who Commits Political Violence？｜ Guest： Aydin Paladin ｜ 12⧸10⧸25

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript

The Auron MacIntyre Show - December 10, 2025

Who Commits Political Violence？ ｜ Guest： Aydin Paladin ｜ 12⧸10⧸25

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript

Who Commits Political Violence？｜ Guest： Aydin Paladin ｜ 12⧸10⧸25